So God created evil, then became angry because so many were evil, and this "perfect" God came up with a plan to wipe-out evil on the Earth. Being omnipotent, he didn't just miracle the evil away. No, he decided to drown it; animals, infants, children... everyone! Everyone except Noah and his family because they were the only people in the entire planet God considered to be worthy of saving. So after all of the anguish, fear, pain, suffering and death.... we still have evil.

So either the story is completely untrue as all evidence would indicate. Or God failed.

When not one living thing has earned the right to be, or even asked to be, as in this attitude that is evident that this person believes it"s entitled to be, but yet it believes nothing gives it entitlement. And has no proof of entitlement to be, but what it thinks. Without God, there is no claim to entitlement to be alive, or have a life or live longer then one day.

Also this statement is stated by someone who has to except the sacrifice of living things in the earth to sustain its life in the flesh or it would be dead by now. Where is the justification for that? Is the entitled"s life more valuable? Or just in a place where it has the power to take the life of other living things in the earth, and eat it for its sustenance and even pleasure? But it accuses its Maker for evil and cruelty as though it doesn"t cause evil and cruelty just by virtue of it breathing.

At 10/10/2014 9:34:24 AM, DPMartin wrote:This particular view is something that is interesting.

So God created evil, then became angry because so many were evil, and this "perfect" God came up with a plan to wipe-out evil on the Earth. Being omnipotent, he didn't just miracle the evil away. No, he decided to drown it; animals, infants, children... everyone! Everyone except Noah and his family because they were the only people in the entire planet God considered to be worthy of saving. So after all of the anguish, fear, pain, suffering and death.... we still have evil.

So either the story is completely untrue as all evidence would indicate. Or God failed.

When not one living thing has earned the right to be, or even asked to be, as in this attitude that is evident that this person believes it"s entitled to be, but yet it believes nothing gives it entitlement. And has no proof of entitlement to be, but what it thinks. Without God, there is no claim to entitlement to be alive, or have a life or live longer then one day.

Also this statement is stated by someone who has to except the sacrifice of living things in the earth to sustain its life in the flesh or it would be dead by now. Where is the justification for that? Is the entitled"s life more valuable? Or just in a place where it has the power to take the life of other living things in the earth, and eat it for its sustenance and even pleasure? But it accuses its Maker for evil and cruelty as though it doesn"t cause evil and cruelty just by virtue of it breathing.

There is no mention of entitlement in the post you quoted.Why do you christians always produce strawmen that you can attack rather than respond to the post you have issue with?

Allegedly your stupid god wasn't capable of magicking people to be good, but he was capable of magicking enough water to flood the entire planet and then magicking that water away again.

We are are talking a couple of hundred years after the dude who actually walked with god died. The whole shebang turned to sh1t and everybody became evil. WTF was this god doing?

At 10/10/2014 9:34:24 AM, DPMartin wrote:This particular view is something that is interesting.

So God created evil, then became angry because so many were evil, and this "perfect" God came up with a plan to wipe-out evil on the Earth. Being omnipotent, he didn't just miracle the evil away. No, he decided to drown it; animals, infants, children... everyone! Everyone except Noah and his family because they were the only people in the entire planet God considered to be worthy of saving. So after all of the anguish, fear, pain, suffering and death.... we still have evil.

So either the story is completely untrue as all evidence would indicate. Or God failed.

When not one living thing has earned the right to be, or even asked to be, as in this attitude that is evident that this person believes it"s entitled to be, but yet it believes nothing gives it entitlement. And has no proof of entitlement to be, but what it thinks. Without God, there is no claim to entitlement to be alive, or have a life or live longer then one day.

Also this statement is stated by someone who has to except the sacrifice of living things in the earth to sustain its life in the flesh or it would be dead by now. Where is the justification for that? Is the entitled"s life more valuable? Or just in a place where it has the power to take the life of other living things in the earth, and eat it for its sustenance and even pleasure? But it accuses its Maker for evil and cruelty as though it doesn"t cause evil and cruelty just by virtue of it breathing.

Did you purposely miss the point of the complaint? The complaint is that is certainly nothing a perfectly loving, good, wise, and powerful God would do. It has nothing to do with entitlement.

At 10/10/2014 9:34:24 AM, DPMartin wrote:This particular view is something that is interesting.

So God created evil, then became angry because so many were evil, and this "perfect" God came up with a plan to wipe-out evil on the Earth. Being omnipotent, he didn't just miracle the evil away. No, he decided to drown it; animals, infants, children... everyone! Everyone except Noah and his family because they were the only people in the entire planet God considered to be worthy of saving. So after all of the anguish, fear, pain, suffering and death.... we still have evil.

So either the story is completely untrue as all evidence would indicate. Or God failed.

When not one living thing has earned the right to be, or even asked to be, as in this attitude that is evident that this person believes it"s entitled to be, but yet it believes nothing gives it entitlement. And has no proof of entitlement to be, but what it thinks. Without God, there is no claim to entitlement to be alive, or have a life or live longer then one day.

In order to validate the claim that "without god there is no ..." you must first indicate WHICH god, and then go on to show that god to actually exist. Don't try to saddle me with a life debt to a being to whom you can't even introduce me. Show me this person exists, before you tell me how much I owe this person...

Also this statement is stated by someone who has to except the sacrifice of living things in the earth to sustain its life in the flesh or it would be dead by now. Where is the justification for that?

The predatory nature of so many things means that either this is the way nature evolved, or that your deity made it so. If it evolved such, naturally, you are owed no explanation. If your deity exists, and things were designed this way, you are still owed no explanation, but you're then also asking the wrong person. The "justification" is survival, in either case.

Is the entitled"s life more valuable? Or just in a place where it has the power to take the life of other living things in the earth, and eat it for its sustenance and even pleasure?

It is in a position to take the lives of other creatures, in order to sustain its own life. Killing for pleasure is something that is done by VERY few animals, man among them. If you'd like "tips" on killing for pleasure, turn your attention to the catholic (christian) church. I would particularly direct your attention to the Inquisitions, and the torture devices and methods used at that time for inflicting the maximum amount of pain, humiliation, and suffering, while claiming divine authority for such. Coincidentally, the divine authority the catholic church claims is the EXACT same deity to which you wish to saddle all of humanity with your petulant little claim of Life-Debt.

But it accuses its Maker for evil and cruelty as though it doesn"t cause evil and cruelty just by virtue of it breathing.

No one has accused any "maker." One has simply pointed out the inconsistency between the christian claims of the definitions of "evil" and the actions of a "perfect" and "loving" entity that cannot even be shown to exist. The cruelty demonstrated in the very human stories is nowhere near divine, loving, or just. The entire point of the segment you quoted was to show that the deity you claim both exists and deserves our undying worship is the same creature that is capable (according to some very stupid human fairytales) of some of the most unspeakable cruelty and malevolent violence ever recorded. The invented deity to whom you assert a debt of gratitude is owed is the same deity you claim to have been responsible for the type of horrors of which Stephen King and Wes Craven would be ultimately proud.

Spit your condescending biblebabble in some other direction. I don't accept your assertion that I "owe" such a creature as your idiot ancestors invented any debt, of any kind. Keep your deity, and quit telling me what I owe him. I feel no such indebtedness.

"Never attribute to villainy that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"
-----
"Men rarely if ever dream up a god superior to themselves. Most gods have the manners and morals of a spoiled child. "

At 10/10/2014 9:34:24 AM, DPMartin wrote:This particular view is something that is interesting.

So God created evil, then became angry because so many were evil, and this "perfect" God came up with a plan to wipe-out evil on the Earth. Being omnipotent, he didn't just miracle the evil away. No, he decided to drown it; animals, infants, children... everyone! Everyone except Noah and his family because they were the only people in the entire planet God considered to be worthy of saving. So after all of the anguish, fear, pain, suffering and death.... we still have evil.

So either the story is completely untrue as all evidence would indicate. Or God failed.

When not one living thing has earned the right to be, or even asked to be, as in this attitude that is evident that this person believes it"s entitled to be, but yet it believes nothing gives it entitlement. And has no proof of entitlement to be, but what it thinks. Without God, there is no claim to entitlement to be alive, or have a life or live longer then one day.

Also this statement is stated by someone who has to except the sacrifice of living things in the earth to sustain its life in the flesh or it would be dead by now. Where is the justification for that? Is the entitled"s life more valuable? Or just in a place where it has the power to take the life of other living things in the earth, and eat it for its sustenance and even pleasure? But it accuses its Maker for evil and cruelty as though it doesn"t cause evil and cruelty just by virtue of it breathing.

There is no mention of entitlement in the post you quoted.Why do you christians always produce strawmen that you can attack rather than respond to the post you have issue with?

Its not a strawman, it a posting that is recent I"m not sure who's because of the imbedded quoting. besisdes who care whether you like that or not. Your not that stupid to think I care about what you like or don"t are you?

So rather than say its one's statement and it be the other's, if he who has posted it wants to respond they can should they recognize it. Its either beastt or greatestiam not sure it been a while on that.

Yes there is, I mentioned it, that which shows the fruits of the attitude of entitlement, doesn"t have to admit it believes it"s entitled, nor state such. He who thinks he is entitled anything blames another for not having it, or being denied it and it must be evil. God gave life to the which had no life meaning the ground. And the ground has no claim nor entitlement to the presence of life that is given the ground. No one or nothing earn the right or entitlement to be in the first place. But if God promised life, then what was promised is entitled only because it is the Word of God that is entitled to be fulfilled. But everything on the planet isn"t promised anything in life, unless it is of the Word of God.

At 10/10/2014 9:34:24 AM, DPMartin wrote:This particular view is something that is interesting.

So God created evil, then became angry because so many were evil, and this "perfect" God came up with a plan to wipe-out evil on the Earth. Being omnipotent, he didn't just miracle the evil away. No, he decided to drown it; animals, infants, children... everyone! Everyone except Noah and his family because they were the only people in the entire planet God considered to be worthy of saving. So after all of the anguish, fear, pain, suffering and death.... we still have evil.

So either the story is completely untrue as all evidence would indicate. Or God failed.

When not one living thing has earned the right to be, or even asked to be, as in this attitude that is evident that this person believes it"s entitled to be, but yet it believes nothing gives it entitlement. And has no proof of entitlement to be, but what it thinks. Without God, there is no claim to entitlement to be alive, or have a life or live longer then one day.

Also this statement is stated by someone who has to except the sacrifice of living things in the earth to sustain its life in the flesh or it would be dead by now. Where is the justification for that? Is the entitled"s life more valuable? Or just in a place where it has the power to take the life of other living things in the earth, and eat it for its sustenance and even pleasure? But it accuses its Maker for evil and cruelty as though it doesn"t cause evil and cruelty just by virtue of it breathing.

Did you purposely miss the point of the complaint? The complaint is that is certainly nothing a perfectly loving, good, wise, and powerful God would do. It has nothing to do with entitlement.

Yes this one, like the like minded, think they are entitled to live, though they didn"t do anything to come into the world nor did they even ask to be born into the world. But they believe they are entitled fulfillment in the world. And the complaint including your view also expressed that this person believes he is entitled, and its God"s fault that there is evil and that men follow evil and because men follow evil God kills them. But men don"t have to follow evil.

At 10/10/2014 10:02:59 AM, ThinkFirst wrote:In order to validate the claim that "without god there is no ..." you must first indicate WHICH god, and then go on to show that god to actually exist. Don't try to saddle me with a life debt to a being to whom you can't even introduce me. Show me this person exists, before you tell me how much I owe this person...

The predatory nature of so many things means that either this is the way nature evolved, or that your deity made it so. If it evolved such, naturally, you are owed no explanation. If your deity exists, and things were designed this way, you are still owed no explanation, but you're then also asking the wrong person. The "justification" is survival, in either case.

I"m sorry does the world revolve around you and how you feel, should I have taken that into consideration? Do you feel someone trying to burden you? That"s to bad, do you think you will ever get over it?

Survival is just, valuing one"s own life over another, and claiming the right or believing one is entitled their own life more then the other is entitled their's, and having or getting the power to sustain that. Not only is life required to give life but life is required to also sustain life, and yes God did make that, that way, but the violent nature in how its carried out, it seems mankind has no problem with. The thing is the same that has no problem with that complains that God can"t be good because He wiped out the world, that has no problem with the execution of violence for its own survival in the flesh.

At 10/10/2014 9:34:24 AM, DPMartin wrote:This particular view is something that is interesting.

So God created evil, then became angry because so many were evil, and this "perfect" God came up with a plan to wipe-out evil on the Earth. Being omnipotent, he didn't just miracle the evil away. No, he decided to drown it; animals, infants, children... everyone! Everyone except Noah and his family because they were the only people in the entire planet God considered to be worthy of saving. So after all of the anguish, fear, pain, suffering and death.... we still have evil.

So either the story is completely untrue as all evidence would indicate. Or God failed.

When not one living thing has earned the right to be, or even asked to be, as in this attitude that is evident that this person believes it"s entitled to be, but yet it believes nothing gives it entitlement. And has no proof of entitlement to be, but what it thinks. Without God, there is no claim to entitlement to be alive, or have a life or live longer then one day.

Also this statement is stated by someone who has to except the sacrifice of living things in the earth to sustain its life in the flesh or it would be dead by now. Where is the justification for that? Is the entitled"s life more valuable? Or just in a place where it has the power to take the life of other living things in the earth, and eat it for its sustenance and even pleasure? But it accuses its Maker for evil and cruelty as though it doesn"t cause evil and cruelty just by virtue of it breathing.

Did you purposely miss the point of the complaint? The complaint is that is certainly nothing a perfectly loving, good, wise, and powerful God would do. It has nothing to do with entitlement.

Yes this one, like the like minded, think they are entitled to live, though they didn"t do anything to come into the world nor did they even ask to be born into the world. But they believe they are entitled fulfillment in the world. And the complaint including your view also expressed that this person believes he is entitled, and its God"s fault that there is evil and that men follow evil and because men follow evil God kills them. But men don"t have to follow evil.

At 10/10/2014 9:34:24 AM, DPMartin wrote:This particular view is something that is interesting.

So God created evil, then became angry because so many were evil, and this "perfect" God came up with a plan to wipe-out evil on the Earth. Being omnipotent, he didn't just miracle the evil away. No, he decided to drown it; animals, infants, children... everyone! Everyone except Noah and his family because they were the only people in the entire planet God considered to be worthy of saving. So after all of the anguish, fear, pain, suffering and death.... we still have evil.

So either the story is completely untrue as all evidence would indicate. Or God failed.

When not one living thing has earned the right to be, or even asked to be, as in this attitude that is evident that this person believes it"s entitled to be, but yet it believes nothing gives it entitlement. And has no proof of entitlement to be, but what it thinks. Without God, there is no claim to entitlement to be alive, or have a life or live longer then one day.

Also this statement is stated by someone who has to except the sacrifice of living things in the earth to sustain its life in the flesh or it would be dead by now. Where is the justification for that? Is the entitled"s life more valuable? Or just in a place where it has the power to take the life of other living things in the earth, and eat it for its sustenance and even pleasure? But it accuses its Maker for evil and cruelty as though it doesn"t cause evil and cruelty just by virtue of it breathing.

Only one big problem:

God didn't create evil.

True he created the potential for it when he gave his creation free will, but evil is a state not a thing which can be created.

At 10/10/2014 10:02:59 AM, ThinkFirst wrote:In order to validate the claim that "without god there is no ..." you must first indicate WHICH god, and then go on to show that god to actually exist. Don't try to saddle me with a life debt to a being to whom you can't even introduce me. Show me this person exists, before you tell me how much I owe this person...

The predatory nature of so many things means that either this is the way nature evolved, or that your deity made it so. If it evolved such, naturally, you are owed no explanation. If your deity exists, and things were designed this way, you are still owed no explanation, but you're then also asking the wrong person. The "justification" is survival, in either case.

I"m sorry does the world revolve around you and how you feel, should I have taken that into consideration? Do you feel someone trying to burden you? That"s to bad, do you think you will ever get over it?

It's funny that, out of all that I wrote, you picked ONE thing about which to try to be condescending, and you fail even at that.

Survival is just, valuing one"s own life over another, and claiming the right or believing one is entitled their own life more then the other is entitled their's, and having or getting the power to sustain that. Not only is life required to give life but life is required to also sustain life, and yes God did make that, that way, but the violent nature in how its carried out, it seems mankind has no problem with. The thing is the same that has no problem with that complains that God can"t be good because He wiped out the world, that has no problem with the execution of violence for its own survival in the flesh.

Survival is an innate instinct, being animals and all. No, your deity never made any life. By the way, your writing is atrocious and ignorant.

"Never attribute to villainy that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"
-----
"Men rarely if ever dream up a god superior to themselves. Most gods have the manners and morals of a spoiled child. "